alaska marijuana legalization
Marijuana Business News

People Are Not Happy About Proposed Alaska Marijuana Regulations

alaska marijuana legalizationAlaska voters approved recreational marijuana legalization and regulation during the 2014 Election. Alaska joined Oregon and Washington D.C. who also voted to legalize in 2014, and Colorado and Washington who voted to legalize in 2012. The proposed rules that will govern the recreational marijuana industry in Alaska were released yesterday. Below are some of the provisions found in the proposal, via Alaska Dispatch News:

• Three types of cultivation licenses: standard, for a business operating with 500 or more square feet of marijuana plants; limited, for a business with less than 500 square feet of plants; and a broker license, which provides the “essential business functions” of a limited marijuana cultivation facility.

• Each facility would need an inventory tracking system, and each plant that is 8 inches tall would need a tracking number.

• Packaging would be required to be childproof, without any sort of images, including cartoon characters, that “target individuals under the age of 21.” All packaging would be opaque, so the product would not be visible.

• THC limits on edibles would be 50 milligrams per package and 5 milligrams per serving.

• Marijuana testing facilities would each need to employ a “scientific director” who has both academic and post-degree laboratory experience in chemical and biological sciences.

• Marijuana social clubs would be prohibited.

The proposed rules are not sitting well with many people in Alaska. People in Alaska feel that the rules were copied from other states without considering the unique characteristics of Alaska. I have long told people that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ set of marijuana regulations. What works in Colorado may not work in Alaska, and what may work in Alaska may not work in Oregon. States can use other states’ rules and regulations as a guide, but they have to be altered in a way that they fit into each state’s culture, nuances, etc.. Alaska is especially different from other states. Public comment is being taken at this time, and final rules are expected to be adopted in late November.

  • There is a one size fits all set of regulations. No more regulated than tomatoes.

  • D Kessler

    These STUPID MOFO’s don’t have a clue. People up there will and are laughing there asses off with this dumb shit.

  • WineO

    Lol…and politicians and bureaucrats wonder why people don’t like them.

  • Jeremiah Emmerson

    I’m in Alaska and this article doesn’t even scratch the surface bud. Try again.

    #1 Problem: Felons can’t license until they have 5 years no charges. Good luck converting people to the white market.

    #2 Problem: Background checks will be conducted on family members.

    #3 Problem: Was not going to allow outside investments, but they have budged on that.

    If you want inside info on Alaskan shit…contact me: support@alaskacannabiscollective.com

  • Kathleen Chippi

    Problem is everyone didn’t listen when those of us in supposedly legal states like CO warned Alaskans–Vote NO cause it’s all a scam and the language and rules were written by MPP and have not been upheld in the court of law as making anything “lawful”….and it sure looks like they copied the language and model that earned CO’s MMJ statutory model (hb10-1284 and later adopted to regulate A64) an F as in FAILED when audited. It’s sent up so only already wealthy people who have not been involved in cannabis (no previous arrests) get to participate and no one else…..and like CO it penalizes people with cannabis arrests a second time, by banning the ‘competition’ (as the ‘players’ see it). After all they bought and paid for these regulations…they are not going to grant them to the rest of us.

  • Nathaniel

    A scientific director is a good idea.
    I am not certain what the need for a broker license would be, unless it is just to open a recreational store.
    8″ plants need to be tracked is ridiculous unless it is producing.
    The rest of the listed proposed seems fine as no one has yet tried to test the cannabis bar ruling, because with that comes a whole host of red-tape attached that I am sure it is a nightmare to consider.
    That said, those with previous convictions has been standard practice for most law. No state wants to buck the system so much so that it isn’t marketed to the general public. Right or wrong does not enter into the conversation when attempting to get a fledgling market off the ground. A legislature wants as broad a support as possible when talking about who can become a part of that system. Like it or not, removing “criminals” [and I would contend stupid criminals for I may have done a few crazy things in my day and never got caught] from that pool is essential to garnering wider spread support.